SB 38-ADOPTION OF SAFETY CODES    CHAIR WAGONER announced there was a work draft committee substitute (CS) in the packets. The hearing was intended to be informational; members could address questions to the sponsor, but public testimony would be taken at a later time. The bill would not move from committee that day. He asked for a motion to adopt the draft and for the sponsor to explain the substitute. SENATOR GARY STEVENS made a motion to adopt CSSB 38 as the working document. There being no objection it was so ordered. SENATOR GENE THERRIAULT, sponsor of SB 38, apologized for not having the CS available sooner. Last session a number of bills were introduced regarding building code issues, but none came to fruition. A Fairbanks group approached him this year and asked him to push the issue to a final resolution. [See sponsor statement in committee file.] In Alaska, construction safety codes are divided between two departments. Fire, building, and mechanical contracting codes are under the jurisdiction of the fire marshal at the Department of Public Safety (DPS) while the electrical and the plumbing codes are housed in the Department of Labor (DOL). Recently the fire marshal elected to switch from the Uniform Code family to the International Code family, which triggered a number of problems. The CS proposes to move the mechanical codes in with the other building trade codes and to leave the building and fire codes with the Department of Public Safety. Individuals performing plumbing, electrical and mechanical job functions must all participate in continuing training to maintain certification where building and fire codes have design phase public safety application. Further justifying the switch is that information from the Department of Community and Economic Development Division of Occupational Licensing regarding statutes and regulations for mechanical administrators indicates plumbing job functions are a subset of mechanical functions. Meshing code requirements from two departments is problematic at best. To save project time and money, the CS allows any project started under the international mechanical code to continue under those codes to completion. Additionally, the workforce is allowed time to retrain because new safety codes would not take effect until three years after adoption. Understandably, turf battles exist between departments, between segments of organized labor, and between individuals that write the codes. Because the complexities of the issue are extensive, it is time for legislators to understand the implications of the issue and make a policy decision. He asked if there were any questions. SENATOR ELTON asked whether the CS adequately addresses turf battles to get away from conflicts that may extend to the authority of plumbers to outside the building into areas that are traditionally handled by other sectors of the labor market. The CS shifts the mechanical code authority to the Department of Labor, but it doesn't necessarily change the relationship plumbers may have with individuals that are doing underground work outside a building. He asked if that was correct. SENATOR THERRIAULT said it was not his intent to shift duties individuals could perform. SENATOR ELTON referred to the transition period addressed in the CS and asked how a transition period was handled when the Department of Public Safety shifted from Uniform to International Codes. SENATOR THERRIAULT replied he wasn't certain and that would be a good question to address to the department directly. The authority by which DPS adopted the International Code was challenged, but the statute was confusing because it refers to the uniform code and the courts interpreted the word "uniform" to be generic saying it spoke of a code not specifically the Uniform Code. If there was a transition period, part of it might have been used up by the litigation during which time people weren't sure whether to retrain or not. Other areas in statute speak specifically of the Uniform Code, which points out the need to clarify terminology. SENATOR ELTON asked whether the statutory conflicts were addressed in the CS. SENATOR THERRIAULT admitted they weren't addressed but could be depending on the legislative policy call. SENATOR ELTON commented the letter from the City of Fairbanks was strongly worded and he wondered whether the CS addresses the concern that local government should have the authority to establish practices they think are best for themselves. SENATOR THERRIAULT replied it was his intent to preserve local control as much as possible. He did want the fire marshal to respond to the impact of allowing local control. SENATOR LINCOLN said she had similar concerns about the resolution from the City of Fairbanks. Since the bill would be heard in this committee again, she said she would submit a list of questions to the sponsor's office. She hoped some of the concerns could be incorporated in an amendment. SENATOR STEVENS asked for assurance there was no intent to reduce or consolidate inspectors in the plan. SENATOR THERRIAULT said the intent was to move the authority to oversee and adopt a particular set of codes from one department to another. He advised occupational licensing has expressed concerns and would like to be included in further discussions. CHAIR WAGONER announced the bill would be held in committee and the public could get a copy of the CS by contacting his office.